Christina,

Re sand, the bottom of the aquarium would be sand in some cases, but
whatever substrate it is always the solid material under fin or foot that
defines where the "border" is drawn. Then there is the cliche metaphor that
has arisen from it. However I thought it interesting that so many recent
campaigns from Morocco to Afghanistan have been or are about to be fought in
arid areas. It's always desert this or desert that. Is that invalidated by
the watery assumptions? I don't know. In some ways water is like sand.

Re  shift from tank to room to telly I wanted to go for a second symbolic
zone, interlocked with the first, that we all live in boxes, (glass boxes)
literally and metaphorically. The poem too is a box.

Thanks for the comments which I find thought-provoking. They are not lost.
You are right that a naivete must be maintained in this poem. Otherwise a
simple biological answer to the question in the fifth line would spoil the
poem. But you could say that the naivete and inclusion of the protagonist in
the poem's criticism is to address counter-dominance instincts in the
reader.

I like your comment alongside the fifth line. It makes me think of the
sliver of carrot and goldfish trick on Candid Camera some years back. These
fish are rather small and would get lost among the chips. My mother in law
thinks I should grow them up for the table.

Colin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christina Fletcher [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 5:24 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: newsub/cichlids
>
> Ah ha, this is such a good read, Colin.  Wonderful subject matter.  I'll
> throw a few thoughts in the text but I really like it.
> bw
> christina
>
>
>
>
>       Cichlids
>
>
>       It is not how we pictured it.
>       We had wanted peace.
>       These fish have everything they need
>       in the aquarium we have arranged for them.  ***  I love this
> sentence.  Oh ho, what interpretations it offers!
>       So why do they fight?                    ***  Why indeed?  The
> buggers - I'd have them with chips if I were you.
>
>       The two biggest have split the space
>       and now they spar
>       on the invisible border drawn in the sand. *** slightly disappointed
> with this image.  If the border were drawn in water...
>       See how they bloat, swell gill and fin,  ***  too many verbs?  I've
> a feeling two would do the trick - more visual power?
>       pump water in and out of mouths
>       when they meet mid-water.    ***  can you find another word for
> water?  You've used it in the last line.
>       Evidently if they did not the other
>       would drive them into a corner.
>
>       So they don't give an inch
>       even though they have already  ***  already have (have already
> sounds as if they've given an inch)
>       whatever they could wish.   ***  hang on, they obviously haven't!
> Oh, you human, you...
>
>
>
> I think it would be possible to finish the poem here.  If you did you've
> leave the reader to draw conclusions.  It would be a marvellous way to
> point out how little we know about what other creatures/people need.  It's
> the British Empire in a tank.
> The rest of the poem sounds slightly preachy.  You know - we know we're
> watching kind of thing.  But why not just leave it to the reader?  Why not
> let the narrator actually be fairly dumbo?  Might it be much more fun and
> likely to provoke an emotional response?  Trust the reader to draw the
> parallels with TV etc.
> bw
> christina
>
>
>
>
>       Their frontiers are well defended.
>       We watch them dance with threat
>       and posture and counter-stance
>       and think ourselves different,
>       other beings entirely,
>       and the tall ones on television who stare
>       through the glass with the evening news
>       know themselves different in turn,
>       assure us they would never do such a thing.
>
>
>
>       Colin
>
>
>
>